If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

An EQ all the way because it serves multiple roles. It can shape speakers, act as a multi-zone control and much more.
The Throttle Box is a fixed notch filter and doesn't really do much for an XM9 specifically.
The XM9 built-in tweeter attenuation switch is a 1-ohm resistor on a 4-ohm tweeter so you get very little audible attenuation.

Krak - The two are mutually exclusive. Over all flexibility would be hands down installing an EQ. Typically those are more expensive then the built in features of the Tbox or tonal switches built in the XM9's.

The switches on the XM9 effect the horn function. The speaker doesn't have a tweeter as mentioned above.
The throttle box is not a notch filter. It manipulates the phase of the horn from narrow to wide.

Both features are subtle changes at rider distance.
An EQ of any brand, would offer dramatic changes at all distances.

Not to argue but since the above contradiction I would like to politely defend a few technical facts.
All horns have a diaphram at the base of the horn. That diaphram is either a tweeter, midrange or woofer. In this case it is a tweeter diaphram for a 'horn tweeter'. When you take the horn apart you will find a titanium dome tweeter loading into a compression chamber at the mouth of the horn. Essentially this is the same design that has been around since the late 1920s. Read my 'Anatomy of an HLCD' article.
A Double-Throw, Single Pole switch at the nose of the XM9 places a 1-ohm resistor in or out of the 'horn tweeter' circuit and when active the resistor is in series before the 2nd order highpass filter of the 4-ohm 'horn tweeter'.
The math to calculate series resistance related to attenuation is:
Take the amount of attenuation in decibles desired. Divide by 20. Convert that to it's inverse log with your scientific calculator. Multiple that times the tweeter's nominal impedance. Subtract from the answer the tweeter nominal impedance.
In this case we are looking at about 1 dB of attenuation under linear conditions. However, the tweeter impedance rises at higher frequencies thereby minimizing the attenuation. Also, the highpass passive crossover increases in impedance as you enter the crossover zone. Both conditions minimize the impact of the resistor and minimize the attenuation at the extremes of the 'horn tweeter' operation. 1 dB is considered the minimum level that the human auditory system can discern. So you may not hear much of a difference with the switch in either position. But don't go by the math. Just listen for yourself.
I think an alternate way of obtaining the 'horn tweeter' attenuation would have been to use a DPDT switch with series/parallel resistance after the passive crossover and before the 'horn tweeter' so the net impedance would be the same whether or not the resistors are in the circuit. This would have helped stabilized the 'horn tweeter' impedance and provided a more linear (equal at all frequencies) attenuation. I would probably go for a 2 to 2.5 dB of attenuation so that the effect is more noticable. Just my opinion on that. Hope this helps.

how about if we all agree to disagree and move on. I'm sure the next post would be brian disproving everything david just posted.. and so on...

you guys are both experts in your field and we all know this. it was an exile thread so I believe that we should leave the answering to brian and let brian stay out of the threads asking for opinions on places to purchase non-exile gear and wetsounds

Krak - To answer your question many people don't want to take the plunge for a 200-400 eq solution in a boat. If you dont have an EQ, these are great features to have. If you do have an EQ, these are redundant things to have. Does that make sense? Sound is such a subjective thing. To much coloration /alteration can be bad. And the same goes with not enough.

I'm not at all trying to down play putting an EQ in a boat, but for many, it just adds to the complexity of the entire system which can bring noise and install headaches into the picture. From a personal point of view, I like EQ's in a boat for all the NON eq functions they typically offer. Most Eq's in this day and age have line drivers and zone controls built into them. Good stuff!

If your starting from scratch, I'd recommend going with an "EQ". It all boils down to cost versus benefit. Make sense?

Sandm - I'd agree. I dont see the point to getting into technical theory in forums. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong. I've spoke to the admins. They know my position. Nuff said.

totally agree on the eq point if nothing more than a great zone controller. one of the comments I kept getting on the last boat was how nice it was to fade the surf hlcd's out when chillin at the dock so you don't piss off the people at the next dock, but I wish I would have added a real eq as opposed to just a fader to have the ability to balance the cabin/tower when surfing. too often the boat was too loud and no one could carry on a conversation while the surfer wanted tunes loud.

It's on my must-have list for the next install this month. hoping mike remembers my zld

I went with the ZLD and now i'm going to sell my KMR 700U headunit as it doesn't get used. I just plug my phone into the aux in port on the ZLD and rock on... so handy. I also installed a bluetooth setup as well and use that most of the time.